2 Cor 8:24 - main verb of ἐνδεικνύμενοι?

Forum rules
Please quote the Greek text you are discussing directly in your post if it is reasonably short - do not ask people to look it up. This is not a beginner's forum, competence in Greek is assumed.
Jonathan Robie
Posts: 3486
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

2 Cor 8:24 - main verb of ἐνδεικνύμενοι?

Post by Jonathan Robie » July 8th, 2018, 3:44 pm

2 Cor 8:24 wrote:τὴν οὖν ἔνδειξιν τῆς ἀγάπης ὑμῶν καὶ ἡμῶν καυχήσεως ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν εἰς αὐτοὺς ἐνδεικνύμενοι εἰς πρόσωπον τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν.
What is the main verb of ἐνδεικνύμενοι in 2 Cor 8:24?
0 x


ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/

timothy_p_mcmahon
Posts: 237
Joined: June 3rd, 2011, 10:47 pm

Re: 2 Cor 8:24 - main verb of ἐνδεικνύμενοι?

Post by timothy_p_mcmahon » July 8th, 2018, 6:50 pm

Could it be an imperative participle?
0 x

Jonathan Robie
Posts: 3486
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

Re: 2 Cor 8:24 - main verb of ἐνδεικνύμενοι?

Post by Jonathan Robie » July 8th, 2018, 7:38 pm

timothy_p_mcmahon wrote:
July 8th, 2018, 6:50 pm
Could it be an imperative participle?
That's a much-debated category. I'm not (yet?) a believer in imperatival participles. But let's keep that in mind and compare it to other answers that come up.
0 x
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/

MAubrey
Posts: 918
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 8:52 pm
Location: Washington
Contact:

Re: 2 Cor 8:24 - main verb of ἐνδεικνύμενοι?

Post by MAubrey » July 8th, 2018, 9:03 pm

Looks like the manuscript tradition sees the same issue that you do.
1 x
Mike Aubrey, Linguist
Koine-Greek.com

MAubrey
Posts: 918
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 8:52 pm
Location: Washington
Contact:

Re: 2 Cor 8:24 - main verb of ἐνδεικνύμενοι?

Post by MAubrey » July 8th, 2018, 9:06 pm

Two options from my perspective:

(1) there is no verb simply because the clause the participial clause depends on has a non-verbal predicate.
(2) this is a sentence fragment produced in normal speech.
1 x
Mike Aubrey, Linguist
Koine-Greek.com

Stephen Carlson
Posts: 2734
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: 2 Cor 8:24 - main verb of ἐνδεικνύμενοι?

Post by Stephen Carlson » July 8th, 2018, 9:52 pm

Here's a lengthy article on the imperatival participle and a classification that 2 Cor 8:24 is a valid example of it: https://bible.org/article/imperatival-p ... -testament

Disclaimer: briefly scanned the article for relevance, not correctness.
0 x
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia

Jonathan Robie
Posts: 3486
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

Re: 2 Cor 8:24 - main verb of ἐνδεικνύμενοι?

Post by Jonathan Robie » July 9th, 2018, 7:44 am

Stephen Carlson wrote:
July 8th, 2018, 9:52 pm
Here's a lengthy article on the imperatival participle and a classification that 2 Cor 8:24 is a valid example of it: https://bible.org/article/imperatival-p ... -testament

Disclaimer: briefly scanned the article for relevance, not correctness.
I can't read the Greek text in that article, which doesn't look like Unicode. Do I have to install a particular font?

I've worked through a bunch of New Testament passages where some people see imperatival participles, and so far I have found other explanations that make more sense to me. I'm still chewing on 2 Cor 8:24.

Do classicists or linguists outside of NT studies believe in the imperatival participle?
0 x
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/

Barry Hofstetter
Posts: 1317
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm

Re: 2 Cor 8:24 - main verb of ἐνδεικνύμενοι?

Post by Barry Hofstetter » July 9th, 2018, 10:21 am

Jonathan Robie wrote:
July 9th, 2018, 7:44 am
Stephen Carlson wrote:
July 8th, 2018, 9:52 pm
Here's a lengthy article on the imperatival participle and a classification that 2 Cor 8:24 is a valid example of it: https://bible.org/article/imperatival-p ... -testament

Disclaimer: briefly scanned the article for relevance, not correctness.
I can't read the Greek text in that article, which doesn't look like Unicode. Do I have to install a particular font?

I've worked through a bunch of New Testament passages where some people see imperatival participles, and so far I have found other explanations that make more sense to me. I'm still chewing on 2 Cor 8:24.

Do classicists or linguists outside of NT studies believe in the imperatival participle?
Well, I can tell you that in 40+ years of doing Greek, much if it outside of the NT, I never remember seeing such a usage. Since my memory is somewhat fallible at times, i also read through the entire section on participles in Smyth, and found no such mention. However, that doesn't mean that it can't exist, especially in later Greek.

The article Stephen cited looks interesting, but useless unless one can read the Greek examples.

The NET Bible note:
The sense of this translation is attested by the fact that most of the later MSS, along with several early and important ones (א C D2 Ψ 0225 0243 1739 1881 𝔐 lat), have the imperative verb ἐνδείξασθε (ejndeixasthe) in place of the participle ἐνδεικνύμενοι (endeiknumenoi), which is found in B D* F G 33 pc. Since an imperatival participle is more Hebraic in style, many scribes would not have understood the idiom as easily and would have been likely to change the participle to an imperative (so TCGNT 513–14). But there is no good reason why scribes would change the imperative into a participle. Thus, ἐνδεικνύμενοι is almost surely the wording of the original text.
tn In the Greek text ἐνδεικνύμενοι (endeiknumenoi) is a present participle which is translated as an imperative verb (see BDF §468; ExSyn 650–52).
I don't have access to BDF (I think my hard copy is packed away somewhere), but Wallace supplies these as clear examples:

b. Clarification and Exegetical Significance

“In general it may be said that no participle should be explained in this way that can properly be connected with a finite verb.” This is an important point and one that more than one commentator has forgetten [sic].

c. Illustrations

1) Clear Examples

Rom 12:9 ἀποστυγοῦντες τὸ πονηρόν, κολλώμενοι τῷ ἀγαθῷ
hate the evil, cleave to the good

1 Pet 2:18 οἱ οἰκέται, ὑποτασσόμενοι … τοῖς δεσπόταις
Servants, submit yourselves … to your masters

Cf. also Rom 12:10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19; 2 Cor 8:24; 1 Pet 3:7. It is to be noted that most of the NT instances of this phenomenon will be found in Rom 12 or 1 Peter.
Wallace, D. B. (1996). Greek Grammar beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (pp. 650–651). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

While I'm not sure that I would make an imperative participle its own category (I would prefer to call it a contextual usage), I note that in most of these instances these participles have been read as imperatival by translators all the way back to the KJV.
0 x
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
Instructor of Latin
Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
Χαίρετε ἐν κυρίῳ πάντοτε· πάλιν ἐρῶ, χαίρετε

Jonathan Robie
Posts: 3486
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

Re: 2 Cor 8:24 - main verb of ἐνδεικνύμενοι?

Post by Jonathan Robie » July 9th, 2018, 3:14 pm

Barry Hofstetter wrote:
July 9th, 2018, 10:21 am
While I'm not sure that I would make an imperative participle its own category (I would prefer to call it a contextual usage), I note that in most of these instances these participles have been read as imperatival by translators all the way back to the KJV.
Sure - and I do think it is a contextual usage.

For instance, here is one of the "clear examples" from Wallace.
Wallace wrote:1 Pet 2:18 οἱ οἰκέται, ὑποτασσόμενοι … τοῖς δεσπόταις
Servants, submit yourselves … to your masters
Shouldn't this be read in the context of 1 Pet 2:13 Ὑποτάγητε πάσῃ ἀνθρωπίνῃ κτίσει διὰ τὸν Κύριον, with ὑποτασσόμενοι taking its imperative sense from Ὑποτάγητε?

And here's the other:
Wallace wrote:Rom 12:9 ἀποστυγοῦντες τὸ πονηρόν, κολλώμενοι τῷ ἀγαθῷ
hate the evil, cleave to the good
Perhaps these participles are governed by an implied εστιν - "hating that which is evil, cleaving to that which is good"? (Paul O'Rear and I were discussing these examples recently.)

Perhaps this is a hint to be wary of the category?
Wallace wrote:It is to be noted that most of the NT instances of this phenomenon will be found in Rom 12 or 1 Peter.
0 x
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/

Jonathan Robie
Posts: 3486
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

Re: 2 Cor 8:24 - main verb of ἐνδεικνύμενοι?

Post by Jonathan Robie » July 9th, 2018, 3:42 pm

Barry Hofstetter wrote:
July 9th, 2018, 10:21 am
The NET Bible note:
The sense of this translation is attested by the fact that most of the later MSS, along with several early and important ones (א C D2 Ψ 0225 0243 1739 1881 𝔐 lat), have the imperative verb ἐνδείξασθε (ejndeixasthe) in place of the participle ἐνδεικνύμενοι (endeiknumenoi), which is found in B D* F G 33 pc. Since an imperatival participle is more Hebraic in style, many scribes would not have understood the idiom as easily and would have been likely to change the participle to an imperative (so TCGNT 513–14). But there is no good reason why scribes would change the imperative into a participle. Thus, ἐνδεικνύμενοι is almost surely the wording of the original text.
tn In the Greek text ἐνδεικνύμενοι (endeiknumenoi) is a present participle which is translated as an imperative verb (see BDF §468; ExSyn 650–52).
I don't have access to BDF (I think my hard copy is packed away somewhere)
I have BDR, the German, which is generally close enough. It's about participles and finite verbs, and the first two points in BDF 468 are directly relevant. This is a loose translation.

1. Paul loves to follow a single finite verb with participles that coordinate with the finite verb and carry the thought forward, sometimes in long sequences.

e.g. 2 Cor 5:12 οὐ ἑαυτοὺς συνιστάνομεν ὑμῖν, ἀλλὰ ἀφορμὴν διδόντες ὑμῖν καυχήματος ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, ἵνα ἔχητε πρὸς τοὺς ἐν προσώπῳ καυχωμένους καὶ μὴ ἐν καρδίᾳ.

2. Related to this, there is anacoluthon in Paul and even more so in Peter with participles that have no direct connection to a finite verb.

e.g. 2 Cor 1.7 (in the indicative sense) ἡ ἐλπὶς ἡμῶν βεβαία ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν, εἰδότες ...
e.g. 1 Pet 2:18 (in the imperative sense) Οἱ οἰκέται, ὑποτασσόμενοι ...
0 x
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/

Post Reply